I got reported but haven't received any letter yet, what should i do?

Z

zerobeta

New member
Joined
Jun 18, 2026
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
i unconsciouly wrote myself a reminder to take my wallet from beneath my chair on the ticket, the proctor found out and reported me… as soon as the exam finished, i wrote an email to CFA explaning the situation and hoping they would understand and not penalize me….
up until today i haven’t received any letter from CFA yet regarding the investigation… what i received, however, was an email yesterday saying they would send my CFA exam results to my email on 23 July 2013 and asking me to verify if my email address was correct…
should I assume they have dropped the investigation? or should I assume they are still investigating since this is probably just a mass email sent to all candidates…
also what do you think the likeliness that they would drop the case? i know CFA is very strict, but are they really going to void my exam results for writting a reminder (even a doodle) on the ticket?
i’m mortified….
 
dude, why did you not just write your reminder about your wallet on the answer book, you may have contravened the testing policy by writing anything on that ticket.
And getting the email does not mean that they would not investigate you. Hopefully they will dop it or just send you a reminder letter.
All the best
 
Jeff, thanks for the positive words…
I lost my consciousness at the time, my mind was solely focused on the exam… i deeply regret that….
but have you heard of any case where they would just send a reminder letter, because it seemed from what they wrote in their website, all previous violaters would eventually be penalized….
 
zerobeta wrote:
Jeff, thanks for the positive words…
I lost my consciousness at the time, my mind was solely focused on the exam… i deeply regret that….
but have you heard of any case where they would just send a reminder letter, because it seemed from what they wrote in their website, all previous violaters would eventually be penalized….
Click to expand...
Check this document from the CFA Institute website
http://www.cfainstitute.org/ethics/...ct Program Documents/can_discipline_stats.pdf
It has details about 1) types of violations & 2) Level of penalization
 
Call them … i know that policy doesn’t allow you to write on the ticket, but you didn’t write any thing related to the exam/material.
Good luck and update us
 
Too early for a letter, earliest ones I’ve seen reported on the forums are end of June. Good luck!
 
I’d expect a letter around the first week of July, but I don’t think anything will come of it.
 
The guy who sat next to me in the exam had a whole pageful of writings on the back of the ticket, and only knew it was a violation when the proctor told him as she came to collect it from him. He started erasing his writings frantically.
I’m sooooo curious to know 1- what was all that he wrote, and 2- what happened after that
But I don’t know tha guy …it would be a shock to see him next June
 
I’ve heard of letters from one month after to just before exam results day (talk about ruining your day!)
Unfortunately there’s nothing you can do but sit back and wait. Perhaps if you are really nervous about it draft up a sample of your defense, this way you’ll feel you are ready to go if something bad happens.
My personal opinion from everything I’ve seen and read on the subject is that CFAI has a flawed exam conduct policy for the following reasons:
1. In some cases the process can take up to nine months to clear. This means you can’t register for the next exam (if you passed).
2. Proctors most of the time don’t say anything when they suspect something, you find out only after the fact.
3. If you are cleared, you have to pay the late registration fees if the initial registration period has run out. This has the unfortunate effect of penalizing the innocent for no reason.
4. It appears many people who get in trouble are accused of ‘stray eyes’, which is very difficult to prove. Placing removable plastic mounted cardboard barriers between exam takers would solve the ‘stray eyes’ problem. The cost would be minimal. While cameras would be a bit more expensive, they would definitely help reduce the subjectivity in proving that cheating is taking place.
5. Even if there is an investigation, there is nothing wrong with releasing the results to the test taker personally, but without granting them the right to claim such officially until the investigation is complete. This way an innocent candidate can at the very least begin studying.
The biggest problem here is that CFAI appears to operate under the same presumption as the IRS, guilty until proven innocent. That really isn’t fair in my view.
Anyway, hope you come out alright!
 
Giovanni

This is the way to administer a world wide exam with 150k of cands who spent hundreds of hours.
it’s not you local school exam, where everybody knows each other and are kind of buddies.
Absolute fear leads to absolute respect of the rules. A wrong move leads to a gun shot. This is called discipline. Otherwisse the things will go out of control. As old as the humankind.
 
Ivan Drago wrote:
Giovanni

This is the way to administer a world wide exam with 150k of cands who spent hundreds of hours.
it’s not you local school exam, where everybody knows each other and are kind of buddies.
Absolute fear leads to absolute respect of the rules. A wrong move leads to a gun shot. This is called discipline. Otherwisse the things will go out of control. As old as the humankind.
Click to expand...
It is actually retarded that in this day and age the CFAI doesn’t employ cameras. I don’t know how many times I have mentioned this and seen others mention it. There’s simply no excuse in defending some of the most weird exam day policies. What if an exam proctor is having a bad day and decides to take it out on someone. It’s really simple - increase my registration fees by a few bucks, if you have to, and start recording the exams. It may take some work, but you’ll definitely save honest people a year (or more). No different than avoiding a Type II error… if you think I committed the murder, give me the evidence. The way things are done now, it’s one person’s word against another’s.
Here’s another simpler solution - if you’re so worried about people’s conduct, why the F would you have people belonging to the same level sit next to each other! As is, the tables are already cramped. Why not have L1 guys sit next to L2/L3 guys? It is a guranteed way to cut back on 50% of violations, if not more. Actually, come to think of it, might reduce 99% of the exam center violations. This way, they can even have the secret police spend more time on AF and other sites for real violations.
 
Ivan Drago wrote:
Absolute fear leads to absolute respect of the rules. A wrong move leads to a gun shot. This is called discipline. Otherwisse the things will go out of control. As old as the humankind.
Click to expand...
Let’s be realistic here, the CFAI is not training marines or navy seals, but financial analysts.
I have nothing against having rules to prevent people from gaining an unfair advantage. What I am against is people who have honestly studied and prepared to be treated as if they are guilty until proven innocent, as well as a failure to use adequate methods to prevent cheating and instead rely on a subjective process who’s accuracy in catching cheating has yet to be adequately proven.
This isn’t the Soviet Union where it was considered acceptable to arrest 100 innocent people out of fear of letting one guilty person escape, lol.
 
There’s no time limit for when people are receiving the notices. until you get teh result email saying you pass/fail, you can still get the letter
 
Giovanni wrote:This isn’t the Soviet Union where it was considered acceptable to arrest 100 innocent people out of fear of letting one guilty person escape, lol.
Click to expand...
I’m curious why you believe that the approach taken toward its candidates, charterholders, and members by CFA Institute must follow the model of the U.S. criminal justice system: presumed innocent until proven guilty. Other jurisdictions (you mentioned the Soviet Union) have other approaches to criminal justice, and, whether they do or not, this is not a criminal matter.
CFA Institute sets the rules; everyone knows that going in. If someone doesn’t like the rules, they’re not compelled to play the game.
 
S2000magician wrote:
I’m curious why you believe that the approach taken toward its candidates, charterholders, and members by CFA Institute must follow the model of the U.S. criminal justice system: presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...
Its pretty simple, if you look at the CFAI curriculum in the economics section, you see exactly what kind of legal system the CFAI says is conducive to foreign direct investment. I think you’ll find that it pretty clearly states countries with a common law system such as the US and UK are held in the highest esteem. That would make it logical that the institute would follow such a system, especially since it evolved thanks to this system. It would be somewhat hypocritical for it to not practice what it preaches.
 
Giovanni wrote:
S2000magician wrote:I’m curious why you believe that the approach taken toward its candidates, charterholders, and members by CFA Institute must follow the model of the U.S. criminal justice system: presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Click to expand...
Its pretty simple, if you look at the CFAI curriculum in the economics section, you see exactly what kind of legal system the CFAI says is conducive to foreign direct investment. I think you’ll find that it pretty clearly states countries with a common law system such as the US and UK are held in the highest esteem. That would make it logical that the institute would follow such a system, especially since it evolved thanks to this system. It would be somewhat hypocritical for it to not practice what it preaches.
Click to expand...
If CFA Institute were hoping for foreign direct investment, it might adopt such a legal system, if it had a legal jurisdiction. I cannot see that it is hoping for foreign direct investment, and it has no legal jurisdiction.
And if it didn’t adopt what it says is the most conducive system, it wouldn’t be hypocritical; stupid, maybe, but not hypocritical.
Your argument is a non sequitur.
 
S2000magician wrote:
If CFA Institute were hoping for foreign direct investment, it might adopt such a legal system, if it had a legal jurisdiction. I cannot see that it is hoping for foreign direct investment, and it has no legal jurisdiction.
Click to expand...
You are looking too specifically at the argument without considering the broader context.
CFAI promotes certain kinds of behavior, both with its ethics program and with its curriculum’s approach to investment analysis. Its pretty clear to me that CFAI advocates the free enterprise system which rests on the common law system found in developed countries. Also, if the institute is adamant about raising ethical standards in the profession, it must likewise be ethical in its approach to members and candidates. This includes the concept of fairness which is stressed in the ethics section.
Is it fair to take a candidate who may have, according to some proctor’s observation, violated a rule, and treat them as though they are a violator (supress exam results, prevent preparation for the next exam, force them to incur a financial loss in registering late)? Out of respect to the candidates who take such pains to study and prepare, I think that giving them just a bit more leeway while instituting mechanisms that would do more to prevent cheating would better serve the purpose of CFAI. The goal shouldn’t be to strike fear into people, the goal is to attract qualified candidates to the CFAI who want nothing more than to be treated with the same standard of fairness that would be expected of them in their profession.
 
The consequences of letting an unethical person get a CFA are much worse than the consequences of letting an ethical person be mistakenly disqualified.
 
Giovanni wrote:Is it fair to take a candidate who may have, according to some proctor’s observation, violated a rule, and treat them as though they are a violator (supress exam results, prevent preparation for the next exam, force them to incur a financial loss in registering late)?
Click to expand...
It is fair to treat all candidates the same. They can all be treated the same by presuming that they’re innocent, and they can all be treated the same by presuming that they’re guilty.
You’re taking “presumed innocent” as the only possible fair starting point. It simply isn’t.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top